Taiwan’s Digital Minister

對於您的第三題，也請參考「數位通訊傳播法」草案第五章的相關想法，並歡迎在下述網站提出詢問，NCC 的同仁會及時綜合回應： http://join.gov.tw/policies/detail/6b949e24-0fe0-4f0a-b5d9-fb3b051de675

7. Yes. Generally we come up with rough consensus that people can live with — as long as the procedure are transparent and accountable, we are seeing people who did not get what they initially demanded nevertheless help defending the result.

8. Private meetings and on-the-record transcripts are fully compatible; note that we allow each participant to make corrections for ten days after the meeting: https://talk.pdis.nat.gov.tw/t/principles-for-handling-official-visits-to-audrey-tang-digital-minister/70

9. In the cabinet there are more independents than members of any party, but in the parliament every party has more MPs than independents ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3A9th_Legislative_Yuan_Seat_Composition.svg ).

10. We need to partner with (and become) media to make relevant facts as easy — and eventually easier — to spread.

11. Informed discussions need to be rooted in evidence. If we are to build a global democratic network of feelings, we need to make sure that these feelings are reflective — this is only possible when they are built upon facts.

12. For scalable listening to work, we need to engage people who prefer interactive & tangible understanding, including children. https://medium.com/@audrey.tang/virtual-reality-for-civic-deliberation-e114234828fe outlines the initial steps; https://medium.com/@audrey.tang/towards-plurality-9b806d8b88ef outlines the main vision.

那請問妳提供的止關方法「做事之前先停一下」，是從佛教的止觀而來，或是有什麼出處嗎？

無論叫「知止」、「心齋」、「冥想」、「內觀」還是什麼別的，出處或名稱並不是很重要，反覆練習就是了。

了解，謝謝 au 的回答（鞠躬）

謝謝

請要如何建置或使用自己的“say it“全文檢索功能呢？

可以到 http://sayit.mysociety.org/ 自由申請。

想請問您平常生活的運轉速度也是差不多的Tempo嗎~如何維持這樣的運轉速度呢~剛剛想到的政委說到"快樂"這件事!

是這樣。關於如何維持，Csikszentmihalyi 曾經提出一套心流（Flow）理論。Siegel 的 Pocket Guide to Interpersonal Neurobiology 也是一本不錯的入門書。

您好, 其實這幾年看到日本 歐美 以及大陸都漸漸對這一塊開始制定屬於自己的國家標準，統一像是能量(Wh) 速度上限V.S.等級(電動腳踏車 電動輕型機車 電動重型機車) 安規標準 容量 重量 工作電壓等等都在其中

這樣對於開發商們無疑是降低成本的一大利多，而像是牌照等等優待不在我的專業領域我不多談，而台灣除了貨物稅減免之外，幾乎沒有任何這方面的動作或消息。

台灣目前我只知道兩間有成功建立的充電站的公司，其中一間有跟地區政府合作，另一間孤軍奮戰，反觀其他國家，許多是由中央政府大力推廣才得以站穩腳步，電動車產業若沒有政府支持，很明顯只是不斷的燒錢而已。

就我親自所見，西班牙某些地方的公共租賃腳踏車已經全面改為電動腳踏車，日本也開始大力推廣電動腳踏車，中國大陸也從過去的高污染鉛酸電池改推較環保的鋰電池腳踏車。

台灣真的很小，要做其實比上述每一個國家都容易，我們的加油站 便利商店密度幾乎是綽綽有餘，私人企業先不提的話，光在中油加油站設置電動汽機車電池交換站就已經是完全可以解決市區電動汽機車的需求，但讓私人企業所止步的是建置的成本與回收的高難度。

這正是政府應該介入的一個關鍵點，用國家力量去推動整個電動車產業，把民間技術資源整合，讓所有廠商有統一的規格去生產各類相關組件，把台灣的電動車產業扶植起來，說實在的，台灣才是最有潛力發展電動載具的地方，城市不大，高速公路休息站距離也不遠，這樣有潛力的地緣背景，是一定可以成為電動車普及化的第一個國家。

唐政委您好：首先説明一下，工業技術研究院隸屬經濟部，屬於財團法人，不是大學。您提到用預錄演講視頻方式辦理，我們可以。但是不知您演講的題目為何？是否可以提供現成視訊檔案，或須要我們派人到您辦公室錄製？（時間約1.5小時）。問答時段（0.5小時），我們可以採用Jit.si平台。由於目前工研院沒採用Jit.si平台，所以資訊部門同仁希望能在您演講之前，到您辦公室測試一下連線是否沒問題。請您指派一位窗口，協助一些事務性工作。還有就是您方便演講的日期及時間為何？工研院產業學院副執行長王本耀敬啟

好的，之前 12/26 已經寫信給您的 email 連絡，也有 Cc 窗口。

妳的回答豪有趣XD，妳對於時間的看法是什麼？為什麼會區分成「今天做得完的」和「有生之年都做不完的」這是活在當下的概念嗎，那今天做不完，但是明天做得完要放在哪一類？難道沒有「這週做得完的」、「這個月做得完的」、「明天要做什麼」這樣的計畫出現？

嗯，每天醒來再看當天能做的事情。

今天做不完就熬夜把它做完... 但近年來已經學會，每天量力而為，不接太多事情。

回應樓下的朋友：確實可以這樣說。

請問這是否便是落實了「將每一天當作自己生命的最後一天來活著」呢？

我有連署，但看不出有什麼用？能否解釋一下 join.gov.tw 的作用為何？如果本案無用，他案何以見得有用？請開釋。另，請問您不覺得在台灣強迫跟團很傻嗎？有空請看一下張景森的 fb ，可了解一下公務員的想法。政策制定可曾考量相關利害關係人的想法。還是 join 歸 join ，政策歸政策？政府善待公務員，公務員才會為政府賣命。

開釋不敢當。各位連署人的留言約七萬字，我周末大致看過了。接下來的工作是協助規劃回應。

一般來說，平台的作用在於讓各界利益關係人（此案也包括旅行從業人員），能有溝通的契機。唯有找出讓大家的意見有效凝聚的方式，才能在投票（擴大影響、參與有限）和占領（擴大參與、影響有限）中間，找出重建互信的方式來。

當然，Join 網站目前僅有基本的記錄、通知功能，必須要在願意運用的前提下，才能發揮更多效益，例如 http://join.gov.tw/policies/detail/1e829bf4-a925-4b14-8658-67783be27c77 。

我們現在正在進行的，是讓更多部會朋友學會充分運用的原則。對於國旅卡案，上周四剛協調出此案的主責部會與連絡人，接下來會按正當程序進行連繫、溝通。

更進一步的想法，請參考 12/16 會議中，與各部會次長的討論： https://sayit.archive.tw/2016-12-16-%E7%A0%94%E5%95%86%E9%96%8B%E6%94%BE%E6%94%BF%E5%BA%9C%E6%94%BF%E7%AD%96%E7%9B%AE%E6%A8%99%E8%88%87%E5%B7%A5%E4%BD%9C%E6%8E%A8%E5%8B%95%E6%9C%83%E8%AD%B0#s17674

感謝政委回應我一個無名小卒。12/16 會議逐字稿已拜讀完畢。先說我的感想，個人對這段特別有感覺：

陳良基我們在520進來後的一個月裡，於6月18日就把教育部課綱的抗爭學生請到部裡面來，我們也請到部長室參觀，原本當時是要衝進去，現在是邀請學生進去，而當時部裡同仁非常緊張，我說：「不然我來主持這一個會。」後來部長也非常放心，因為在籌備的過程中就用開放的方式，報名也是在網路上開放，當天也網路直播，本來部裡面擔心會很多人來，結果來的人不到一百人，你越開放，他們會越放心，所以利害關係人有沒有參與的概念，真的是非常重要的，不然他會在外面產生更多的問題。

國旅卡事件就是完全沒有這種程序，才令人生氣。什麼樣的事情會有？大概就是要衝到立法院或行政院的才會有？

既然「Join 網站目前僅有基本的記錄、通知功能，必須要在願意運用的前提下，才能發揮更多效益」，那針對您所說的「對於國旅卡案，上周四剛協調出此案的主責部會與連絡人，接下來會按正當程序進行連繫、溝通」也不會抱太大的希望。畢竟這種明明知道有爭議還要強渡關山，事後再來檢討的思維非常奇怪。所謂的「接下來會按正當程序進行連繫、溝通」指的又是什麼？也是一團迷霧。

個人只有小小的希望，若從此國旅卡一案(雖然這不是要公告60天的法案)，能夠透過新的開放政府運作機制，訂出遊戲規則，不論結果如何，可以讓公務員心服口服的話，所有公務員對於未來您推動的開放政府都會予以支持，若沒有，則一切都是奢求。

您好，按正當程序進行連繫、溝通，指的是《公共政策網路提議實施要點》裡的聯繫提議者、瞭解提議訴求、召開研商會議、資料提供、正式回應等各階段。

以此案為例，交通部觀光局已聯繫原始提案人，釐清並確認其提案內容，逐字稿如下： http://join.gov.tw/attachments/9e3894c7-11a1-41f4-a25c-9fb906e9f151

隨後，Join 平台同步將新聞稿「國民旅遊卡消費方式將新增自由行 擴大旅遊多元性」連結寄給連署人，並附上圖文說明（懶人包）： http://www.ey.gov.tw/DL.ashx?u=%2fUpload%2fRelFile%2f19%2f745517%2fdfb7b74c-3e09-4c7b-8601-9f7bbe44e827.pdf

接下來在1月12日前，交通部觀光局將彙整與本案訴求有關之內容，製成簡報檔公開，隨後也會公告12月29日召開之「Join平台國旅卡案後續事宜」會議逐字記錄。

最後，1月21日以前將正式、逐點回應提案人提案訴求。

1. 我認為的B型企業是指 B Labs 認證的 B Corp；CSR指的是企業社會責任，所以就這個定義，想請教他們三者有什麼不同？

2. 之前會問這題是因為據我的了解像是北市府或是經濟部都是在社會企業的計畫下去提到B型企業這件事情，但是B型企業真的適合在社會企業的脈絡下討論嗎？社會企業既然都是為解決社會問題而存在，那應該就要具備B型企業所提到的對員工好、對環境好等部分，那申請B型企業對於社會企業來說，是否就只是個認證自己有做這件事的效果呢？那就CSR而言，有些企業可能是自己願意擔負企業社會責任，有些則可能是為了大眾的期待，或是為了滿足法規的「企業永續報告」而已，那企業去做B認證是否代表著他是真的有想要藉由B認證，有效提升自己的CSR呢？因此，B型企業是否應該是在CSR的脈絡下討論，而非在社會企業的脈絡下呢？

4-1 根據「中小企業發展條例」所認定的中小企業標準，中小企業為求組織彈性與活力，組織架構通常是資本額與人數較少的型態，在這樣的狀況之下，中小企業在獲利的同時是否也有能力兼顧企業社會責任呢？追求企業社會責任是否會成為中小企業的負擔？　那中小企業適合申請B型企業嗎？4-2 所以社會企業、中小企業需要B認證嗎？社會企業、中小企業需要做CSR嗎？

5. 所以台灣目前僅有大型企業需要製作「企業社會責任報告書」，因此受到證交所的規範；沒有做報告書的企業，政府會去提倡他們做CSR嗎？那又是哪個單位負責的呢？

是否能提供日前12-02 社會企業專章修法討論中，所使用之簡報內容(黃銘傑：我們現在給大家的簡報裡面有兩份，一份比較小的也是橫的，另外一份比較大的，因為我們的助理非常認真，只要有新的資料就會開始增加...略)https://sayit.archive.tw/2016-12-02-%E7%A4%BE%E6%9C%83%E4%BC%81%E6%A5%AD%E5%B0%88%E7%AB%A0%E4%BF%AE%E6%B3%95%E8%A8%8E%E8%AB%96#s16569

1. 我的初步理解，「社會企業」特指以達成社會使命為目的，永續經營為運作模式的企業。B Corp 是一種認證方式（包括公司治理、勞工、社群、環境等面向），與企業自行定義 CSR 之間的差異，主要在於認證標準。

2. 如前所述，我覺得這兩個進路互補，是相輔相成的，兩個脈絡都可以討論。

4-1. 近年來社會大眾對於企業的期待，已不僅止於追逐獲利，而是也能解決現今社會所面臨的問題。隨著這種期待的增加，CSR 可以逐漸成為品牌差異化、與各界利益關係人溝通的優勢，而不止是負擔。

4-2. 誠如您所說的，有些是經營者願意擔負企業社會責任，有些則可能是為了大眾的期待，或是符合法規。無論是滿足哪一種需要，都樂見其成。

5. 目前以我所知，經濟部中小企業處、勞動力發展署各有相關的業務，包括CSR教育輔導、媒合社會企業投資、以及未來的勞動力發展創新獎勵等。（詳見 http://tinyurl.com/au-20161101 「社會企業行動方案第十次聯繫會議」逐字稿）

簡報內容我手邊目前沒有，詢問中，請稍候。

黃老師的簡報，敬請參考：http://www.slideshare.net/vtaiwan/ss-70253832

這是修法研議檢討過程中之參考文件，未來公司法中是否訂定社會企業專章或專節，尚無定論，歡迎到 http://vtaiwan.tw/social-enterprise/ 留言討論，我們會邀請具建設性評論的朋友，出席明年初的線上諮詢會議。

謝謝您~社會企業是一個很值得討論的議題除了偏向社企型npo的組織以外，希望也能多納入社企型公司的意見，讓兩方都能充分受到立法保護

唐鳳妳是這個網站的管理員嗎？http://www.slideshare.net/vtaiwan?utm_campaign=profiletracking&utm_medium=sssite&utm_source=ssslideview

它的URL寫錯了XD https;//vtaiwan.tw/ -> http://vtaiwan.tw/

感謝，已經修正成 https://vtaiwan.tw/

Hi, Thank you for such a quick response. Just to be clear, you see these as independent issues? That would imply you do not see a connection between two of the world’s most-recognized startups potentially being pushed out of the country, and the message that sends to potential Silicon Valley investors? David Plouffe said when he was in Taiwan, "To be saying you want to be the Silicon Valley of Asia, and potentially pushing out other countries’ innovative companies, is not the right message.”

To me, the "Asia · Silicon Valley" plan is about linking with Asia and connecting to the Silicon Valley; it's not about becoming the Silicon Valley of Asia.

I have discussed this (and much more) with David Plouffe in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQpUx5Ob1r8 :-)

謝謝政委不吝指教。

1.田村毅老師的作品，請問是這一個作品嗎?(家父買的是這個>《搶救繭居族：家族治療實務指南》

2.想請問「網路與實體結合的地區社群」具體來說是怎麼結合?有實際的例子嗎?

3.如果「不以學歷或成就取向」那會不會造成培養出「無法創造價值」的結果呢?(也就是雖然學會一堆有的沒的卻對所謂「拼經濟」、「養家活口」沒幫助?

4.想請問如果是自願要當「尼特族、繭居族」的人(記得這個身分，是不事生產卻有在消耗社會資源的，這有問題對吧他們該被強制治療嗎?他們有罪嗎?

1. 是的。

2. 像零時政府社群就是一個例子。

3. 找到共同的志趣，通常生活品質也會跟著改善。

4. 這也許是癥狀，但未必是疾病，更不是犯罪。可以參考 https://www.parenting.com.tw/article/5070873-%E5%94%90%E9%B3%B3%EF%BC%9A%E6%88%91%E6%83%B3%E5%81%9A%E7%9A%84%EF%BC%8C%E9%83%BD%E6%98%AF%E7%84%A1%E6%B3%95%E5%AE%8C%E6%88%90%E7%9A%84%E4%BA%8B/?page=8 的描述。

1.那可能要認真看看了XD

2.好噢 我有空查查看~

3.「通常」嗎?那所謂「吃喝玩樂的志趣」有可能改善生活品質嗎?

4.的這篇文以前看過www(之前有訂親子天下可是「尼特族、繭居族等於網路成癮」嗎@@?

對飲食有要求而自己下廚，或體驗飲食活動、了解食物生產過程，也是一種志趣，當然可以提高生活品質。

確實不能說是完全等同，但有些原則是相通的。

一.假如是尼特族、繭居族對飲食有要求「而自己下廚」，「或體驗飲食活動」、「了解食物生產過程」

上面說到的三個舉動，的確可以提高生活品質但全都是「消耗社會資源卻不事生產」的舉動，不是嗎?

基本上都要「花錢」和時間去做，而且舉動本身也「賺不到錢」?(尼特族、繭居族的「花錢」，不都是在「消耗社會資源」?(因為他們沒在賺錢

二.想請問「有些原則是相通的」具體來說是指?

是指「到底想在『網路上』(尼特、繭居生活中)找尋什麼、分享什麼？如果是找得到、給得出的東西，那是件好事；

但如果找的是『一個擁抱、一個親吻和安慰』(在下不太清楚尼特、繭居族有要找什麼)，那他就是在『網路上』(尼特、繭居生活中)，找尋永遠找不到的東西，『成癮』(尼特、繭居的程度)便會愈來愈強。

父母該做的，就像釋放老鼠到藍天綠地一樣，給小孩一個良好的、自由成長的空間。

(這意思是要父母要養他們嗎?」這樣子的相通嗎?

綜合回應：我想在學習的過程裡，社會和家庭可以提供一定的安全網。並不是什麼活動，都以參與者的金錢產值作為衡量。有空時，或許可以尋找一些附近的食農教育、農夫市集等活動。

呃......我剛剛覺得要多了解一點再說話所以把回應刪掉

但沒辦法完全刪掉，不知道怎麼做orz

所以我了解完後會再修改這則留言orz

家庭是安全網的一環，同好社群也是安全網的一環，可以互相補強。

如何平衡和溝通，牽涉到特定家庭情況，比較難只透過文字傳達，抱歉無法給出更具體的建議。

我想就《搶救繭居族：家族治療實務指南》討論

請問唐鳳政委有辦法參考書中內容嗎?

(沒辦法我就把書中原文抄一遍)

呃，我應該不會討論到特定家庭情況所以沒關係

手邊沒有這本書，剛訂了，明天應該可以到貨。

下周行程較滿，不一定可以及時回答，但歡迎先問在這裡，我抽空回應。

啊.....剛剛顯示錯誤orz

這回錯了要怎麼刪掉啊@@?

剛訂了XD太佩服您啦orz

嗯，我可以慢慢等，完全不急的 ^ ^

我先補上我參考的資料>(持續增加後補上orz(統一整理在這貼文中了orzhttps://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1850209828549224&id=100006806730568

~

〈隱蔽人士 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書〉寫說「尼特族只是拒絕工作，繭居族則是一種更為封閉的狀態」，所以我想要問的是尼特中的繭居族這族群

~

繭居似乎比較嚴重且是必須先解決的我就《搶救繭居族：家族治療實務指南》討論

Q1請問p321提到台灣的資源如果是成年人，可以使用嗎?

~

然後關於尼特解決方法-〈尼特族 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書〉>「尼特族之所以成為尼特族，是因為他們認為世間冷漠，所以應傳達出世間還是有溫暖的訊息，讓尼特族了解生命的意義是與他人的連結及付出，並知道自己的存在價值，想辦法找出適合自己的性向及能勝任的工作。」

Q2想請問台灣有什麼資源讓尼特去「找出適合自己的性向及能勝任的工作」?(對繭居族的資源，尼特適用嗎?

Q3請問如果尼特繭居族已成年，家人不顧他的死活違法嗎?(例如把他趕出去讓其自生自滅

~

1. 衛福部安心專線（0800-788-995）、張老師（1980）、各縣市社會局、身心科診所和諮商機構，這些資源，成年人都可以使用。

2. 這屬於職能治療的範圍，比較不是我的專業。建議可以在連絡上述資源時，一併詢問附近的職能治療資源。

3. 對不能維持生活而無謀生能力者，家人有扶養責任。（民法第 1117 條）

接著關於拒學症的定義

〈吾心文教基金會〉>http://www.wushin.org.tw/6-2-1.html

〈學校恐懼症 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書〉>https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/學校恐懼症

想請問一個假設案例沒有生理症狀也不是很想去但去不了學校而是學校的教育體制和環境無法讓當事人畢業(成績不及格就算要畢業也是得在很壓迫很痛苦的過程下才有可能而當事人又不是有特殊才能(例如書呆子或是資優生(然後成績中上但不穩定、要壞不壞要好不好只是一個既不標準又不特別的半吊子

但又符合日本官方規定繭居三點症狀和半年標準(以上參考《搶救繭居族家族治療實務指南》(之後為了方便，所以小民就簡稱該書了orz)P46(例如台灣高中連續休學期限是兩年的樣子然後假設當事人是高中連休兩次的那種(一次一年Q1想請問，以上這種案例是否在守備範圍外呢@@?

Q2該書p46頁的繭居症狀第二條如果該案例符合敘述但又在網路上他人對話討論的話交際範圍算狹隘嗎@@能算是符合第二條嗎?

這些判準都是溝通用的。與其自己判斷是在內或在外，不如和上述資源的朋友們用來溝通。

另外，如果不願意進入學校體制，也可以參考實驗教育三法，辦理在家自學或社區共學。

:-) .. Brilliant. Tks.

Thank you Audrey for the attention. For us Peruvians to have a digital ministry maybe even sounds futuristic. But knowing that it is possible and that you can do what is preached, I am sure that fills us with a lot of motivation. Thank you very much. Hans Lavado

太棒惹~~ 希望全世界以後都 CC。我也會努力 CC 的~

活動剪影看不太懂......語言能力不足

希望會有大大提供台灣中文的cc字幕orz

(先存起來好了

"Change defined is change denied. :-) It starts with imagination beyond existing definitions."It's so wise and open. I would like to share it on Facebook/ public, is it ok with you? Thank you!

Sure! Everything I write here is under CC0 and feel free to share as you like.

For shorter forms (e.g. in a tweet) feel free to use the short share links, e.g. http://wslk.io/DOwJz for this one.

所以提點子無權提出屬於總統府直轄的相關主意？

是的，「以行政院及其所屬各級機關之業務範圍內為限」。請參考要點： http://gazette.nat.gov.tw/EG_FileManager/eguploadpub/eg022155/ch01/type2/gov01/num1/Eg.htm

對於這樣的設計，您不覺得哪裏怪怪的嗎？遇到總統府就不許人民提點子？還是人民另有提點子給總統府的平台？

目前有 http://www.president.gov.tw/Default.aspx?tabid=221&lctl=General&ctid=121 （論壇）及 http://www.president.gov.tw/Default.aspx?tabid=222&Step=Write （信箱）兩種管道。

ㄟ⋯⋯，現在是在搞笑了嗎？請教哪裡可以查到經由這兩個管道反映人民意見之後的處理進度？

http://www.president.gov.tw/Default.aspx?tabid=222&Step=Lookup 是信箱的，論壇目前並無查詢介面。

論壇不只沒查詢介面，而是根本沒在回應吧？！這樣的論壇功能何在？

功能在於做為政府施政的參考。

新的資通訊技術推出時，前一代的工具並不因此自動消失，每個機關的進線系統（首長信箱、民代陳情、各系統意見論壇、粉絲團留言、公聽、說明會）若未整合，也容易造成重複的紙上作業。這會需要和各機關的研考（綜規）合作，一起整合現有的各系統。

由於個別祕書、替代役的經驗較難傳遞，所以才會參考 OGP 的經驗，做出初步規劃： https://youtu.be/6us3g7Nsu-Q?t=21m12s

本於政務委員職責，我的工作是對行政院中央部會的協調。個人作為自由軟體開發者，程序與工具當然歡迎各界使用（馬德里市議會已經考慮逐步導入了），但都必須出於自願。作為安那其，我不會向任何特定人施加任何壓力或期程，也請諒解。

抱歉，讓政委感覺到被施壓了！

4. We use a combination of strategies. One is called pol.is, which is a two-dimensional representation of everybody's feelings on a particular topic and the idea is that you go to this website shows you one sentiment of the public policy, and you can press "Yes" or "NO" as you press "Yes" or "NO" your avatar — your Facebook profile or twitter profile — moves in this space where people who share very similar opinions with you and you can see in the cluster.

So even if 5,000 people get mobilized to vote exactly the same, they would just be one dot in this two-dimensional map. The map values diversity of opinions, so what we're saying is that we're collecting how diverse how different everybody views the same facts, and then we show it back to everybody —including the minority and majority — then we say after a month time, we're collecting everything above a threshold into our agenda.

The threshold is define — for example, in cases of the private car dispatch systems, we had a majority group with 60% and minority with 40% so we say now the threshold is 80%, you have to propose any sentiment to convince 80% of people in order to be included in agenda of the next decision-making.

The number 80% was calculated by taking all of 60 and then half of 40, so no matter how much you mobilized — like if you mobilize it into 80%/20%, the threshold will become 90%. The idea is that no matter what you still to convince the majority of the minority group. People would then move from proposing radical opinions into more eclectic thoughts, so we got very high quality opinions at the end of the 3 week or 4 week per period.

5. I think the most important thing is that people are risk-averse because they really don't know what will happen when it fail. This is the same as startups: If the cause of starting a company is very high, then it means the cost of failure is also very high. We policymakers usually focus on how to lower the barriers of setting a new company, and so that if you set up at 10 and fail 9 of it, you don't feel much of anything because of the cost of failing is low.

However, in Taiwan's public servants system the cost of failing is unpredictable, because it all depends on how the popular media frames it... So because of the unpredictability of risk, most public servants, when they're making decisions, they overestimate the risk to the maximal amount.

So our work is not about minimizing risk really, it's defining risk it's about making sure that okay if this policy fails, then after another 60 days we can go back and make a revision; if this policy is a bad idea, we have 60 days for people to voice their opinions.

So it's not shameful if you have a draft that didn't take care of some stakeholders, because those stakeholders will show up and tell you that : "Hey! You missed our voices!" and it's okay to revise.

Previously, the habit is that it needs to be almost perfect before it could be announced to the public. However, if you forgot some stakeholders they would let you know on the street — then the risk is very high, right?

So by spreading the risk to the early stages of policy-making, we make the risk containable, definable and also share part of agenda setting power but also responsibility with the private sector and with civil society.

Once everybody carries some of the risk of bad policy and some of the responsibility to correct it — if it proves to be a bad policy — then we are all responsible to work on a second revision of it. In that way, the public servants burden is lessened; their risk is lessened; and so then I think they would then try something new.

6. On this topic, I think the most radical aspect is not the content, but the bottom-up process by which the content may be made.

I'm aware that one possible enactment, the "Citizen Participation in Constitutional Reform Procedure Act", has been proposed, but it's within the purview of legislators, and as a public servant in the administration I would not comment on specific versions.

7. I think entrepreneurial spirit is part of Taiwan's culture already. The main work that government should do is to lower the burden of starting up something — if you spend a lot of time and capital to set up a company, a lot of efforts a lot of hoops to jump through, and then you fail; the failure will feel like something very disappointing.

However, if it is trivial to set up a company, and it's possible to get some initial buy-in to your idea, then it doesn't really feel like a failure — it would feel like a learning experience.

Then people can proudly say I failed 9 times and then I'm still asking another round of seed money; because each of these failed in the very early stage — maybe it doesn't meet the market's needs, it is not fit — but there isn't much face to lose in each of those cases.

8. In the Digital Nation plan ( http://www.slideshare.net/releaseey/1-m-69478090 ), we try to design the infrastructure in a way that, regardless of the industry — whether it's a startup, or a established company who is looking for digital transformation — could enjoy an affordable bandwidth, an affordable way of communication to the regional governance structure.

We are also streamlining ways of of communicating to the international audiences, to more easily securitizate company assets, and to recruit international talents to Taiwan.

9. This question is within the purview of the National Development Council, headed by commissioner Chen Tien-Chi. On this topic I'm just an advisor on issues related to digital technologies.

10. The g0v community started at the end of 2012 by a bunch of hackers, one of which is my very good friend, Chia-Liang Kao. They initially started this initiative to build a domain name g0v.tw, that provides an alternate shadow government website for every national ministry, so that it solves the discovery problem.

The environmental agency, for example, that would be env.g0v.tw. Everybody can change the O in the browser environment to a 0, and then get into this shadow government which presents the same information, except open source, and with good visualization, interactive, and participatory.

After a couple of months, I joined working with the ministry of education’s dictionary data. We eventually covered pretty much all the agencies that we care about for administration. We have a community code that basically says all g0v projects must be released with open source and creative commons licenses.

This means that when a government is happy with our work, then they merge with our work, which they did. That’s a very interesting no-violent way of collaborating with the government.

11. Please refer to my good friend Allison Randal's work: https://allisonrandal.com/2012/04/15/open-source-enlightenment/ — this week I just recorded an interpretation of it in Mandarin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZz4croRkI8

12. The translation mechanism between people of diverse sectors and skills is one key aspect; the other key aspect is "process as commons" — please refer to http://www.slideshare.net/autang/the-geopolitics-of-cities-old-challenges-new-issues/239 for a detailed writeup.

以為右上角寫search people只能搜尋帳戶沒想到能搜尋全文呢，找到了，感謝唐鳳

如果您需要的話，我可以問您問題喔！如果您願意的話，再告訴我您希望回答哪方面的問題，我再想來讓您練習噢！:-)

太感謝你了！我很需要！嗯⋯跟焦慮、失眠或情緒相關的問題吧！

1.那請問唐鳳

沒辦法經驗到這樣的情緒

會覺得遺憾或有所不足嗎?

2.請問您認為一個人應該、必須有生氣的經驗嗎?

感謝樓上，我覺得我的問題很弱，但覺得你延伸出來的問題很棒。:)

確實，有些主觀經驗不同時，會影響到人際關係，例如像我的朋友感到憤怒而採取較有侵略性的行動時，我當下會難以投入相同的行為裡。

不過，多元社會就是建立在各自有所不足、互相補足上的。還是引用同一句 Cohen 的歌詞：

「鐘能敲響就敲響，十全樽俎莫指望。萬事萬物都有缺口，缺口就是光的入口。」

社群朋友的跨平台實作函式庫，已經於近日採 BSD 2-clause 開源授權釋出。

目前已有簽章驗章功能，預計年後會加上其他相關功能： https://github.com/orsonwang/Taiwan_CDC_RI

瞭解，我會向這兩個單位詢問進一步的規劃，謝謝

Yes , I do , but not forever

抱歉您的回答我轉換地白話一點，請問是否為：如果部會願意主動合作我們願意提供數位平台整合，但是目前沒有人主動?

可以這樣說，不過平台也還沒有正式上線（正在安排資安認證測試），等上線之後再看情況。

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OT3Zi6UOZ6PhBAfD4R7uQ4LGcvXoun8YB4AC3pGltVs/edit?usp=sharing

抱歉我的文筆非常的差，我盡量把我想要表達的寫在上面了

感謝，寫得非常清楚。

希望如果有任何需求麻煩告知我讓我幫忙QQ

唐鳳你下週自己一個人出國嗎？:D

是，自費公假出國，到馬德里、倫敦、巴黎，參加公民科技、開放政府相關活動。

每個人都可以報名嗎？還是必須受邀請才能去呢？：D

是可以報名，但報名時間都已經過了~ http://medialab-prado.es/article/herramientas-para-una-democracia-real-2016 https://en.ogpsummit.org/faq/

「~」是什麼意思？語調拉長的意思嗎？XD

是的。

為什麼妳有時候用「。」結尾，有時候用「～」結尾？在什麼情況下要語調拉長呢？可以告訴我嗎？謝謝。

通常會用「。」結尾，但這次這樣回答感覺比較嚴肅，並且提問也是用表情符號結尾，所以改成「~」。

1. 可是我覺得人們好像是想表現調皮的語調才會用「～」結尾耶。（那只是我的觀察，因為妳在網際網路誕生一開始就參與了，妳的感受應該比較準。）2. 提問用表情符號結尾和妳用「～」回答的結尾關聯是什麼？我想不明白。3. 「～」是不是只有台灣人才會用呀？我第一次看到是在日本卡通。想知道的理由是希望能對網路語言有更多的認知才不會造成誤解。o(〒﹏〒)o

ヽ(>∀<☆)ノ

1. 同意你的觀察。

2. 我想 :D、XD 和 ~ 的語調比較接近。

3. 我在各地的聊天室都有遇過這個用法。

龜王您好，第二次跨部會協調的逐字稿已經釋出： https://sayit.archive.tw/2016-11-17-%E7%AC%AC%E4%BA%8C%E6%AC%A1%E7%A0%94%E5%95%86%E9%9B%BB%E5%AD%90%E7%AB%B6%E6%8A%80%E9%81%B8%E6%89%8B%E5%9F%B9%E8%82%B2%E5%8F%8A%E7%8D%8E%E5%8B%B5%E8%BC%94%E5%B0%8E%E7%9B%B8%E9%97%9C%E4%BA%8B%E5%AE%9C#s14573

📗 未來類似「TPC 台北盃電競大賽」的活動，若符合常態舉行等三項條件，就請招生委員會循程序再次討論，不需跨部會協調。

📗 感謝文化部與役政署費心規劃 2017 年電子競技選手替代役事宜，這對數位文化的主流化很有幫助。我們可將此視為試辦性質，並視實際情況檢討修正。

因為過程順利，後續將回到部會作業，不需再次協調。再次感謝您的意見和貢獻。

Thank you very much for your answers.

On 2 - What do you mean by someone's "values" ? Merits, actions, beliefs ? On what standards do you define someone's "value" ?

On 6 and 7 : So, as I understand it, working on LGBT rights means, in your case, working to improve and ease the public dialogue on these issues ?

I feel (but I may be wrong, of course) that, in general (on all kind of issues), you prefer to make people discuss and talk than to share your personal point of view, no ?

Thx again

2. I mean it in its ethical sense: The degree of importance associated by an individual. On their own standard.

6-7. That is correct. As a facilitator, I ask everyone to share the public facts, starting with the facts I have. Then I share my feelings as well as listen to stakeholders who have feelings on this matter.

To jump directly into interpretations — without considering facts and each others' feelings — would be ideological, and it's indeed something that I refrain from doing.

Ok, thank you very much for your time :-)

Hello,

Thank you very much for the answer and I apologize for not having gotten back to you sooner. I was in rural parts of South Africa with little wifi coverage. I am now in Beijing and with a VPN, the internet is easier here.

I actually had heard from friends (some of which you may meet) back in France that you may be over there at those dates. How ironic!

As for the Q&A, thank you for offering to continue. I really appreciate it. How would you prefer to move forward? As you can imagine, I have a list of questions for a potential interview (I usually aim at questions for roughly a half-hour to an hour discussion depending on the interviewee). If that sounds ok to you I could send them to you. However, maybe a more "humane" and interactive way - also less time consuming for you - could be to set up a Skype call? Either way is fine with me (or if you think of another, I am all ears). Please advise.

I look forward to your answer.

Best Regards,

Vincent

Please let's use of this platform, preferably one question at a time — it actually takes less time for me to type than to speak. :-)

No problem at all. I will format them for the medium and post them later in the week. Thank you very much.

Dear Minister Tang,

Please find below the questions I was hoping to ask you, had we been able to meet in person. I also thought it maybe useful to briefly give a bit more context on my research.

I am an innovation professional from France and I am currently undertaking a 9-month study on post-industrial transition in preparation for a book (www.whathappensnow.xyz). This study spanning a dozen countries and structured with the help of the Sorbonne in Paris, focuses on the analysis of new models in various sectors of society (public governance, education, business models, corporate structures, etc.) so as to better qualify the underlying trends responsible for the transition as a whole.

Taiwan’s innovations in democratic governance (vTaiwan, pol.is, having a Digital Minister and the Sunflower Movement preceding all this of course) are very interesting to my study.

I have limited my questions to the following 10. I realise this maybe a lot to ask. If it is too time consuming for you to answer (though I am personally in no rush), please tell me and I will find a way to reduce it more. Hopefully, you will find the questions interesting.

I thank you very much for your time and generosity.

Best Regards,

Vincent

Questions

1. How would you define the difference(s) between representative democracy and direct democracy? Is the role (rights and responsibilities) of the Citizen changing today?

2. You are currently travelling to Spain, Britain and France. Is today’s global interest in other forms of democracy just due to new technological possibilities or do you think there are other social or societal reasons driving this change?

3. What movements, projects or examples inspire you outside of Taiwan?

4. If democracy becomes more and more dependent on technology, how do you guarantee all Citizens access to these tools?

5. Pol.is and in general, the vTaiwan process is very impressive and has been wonderfully thought through. However, how do you guarantee that no special interest groups “hijack” the tools and influence policy at the stage of consultation? (For example coding an A.I. to create multiple fake profiles and change the discourse on pol.is.)

6. What is your position on Liquid (or Delegative) Democracy? Do you wish it be implemented in some way in the Taiwanese political system?

7. What is your position on Sortition? Do you wish it be implemented in some way in the Taiwanese political system?

8. You are a strong advocate of transparency. How do you make sure normal citizens do not get overwhelmed and lose themselves in the huge amounts of data public institutions generate and could share with full or near-full transparency?

9. While discussing automation and the possibility of Universal Basic Income, you mentioned the need to disentangle the notions of “work” and “jobs”. What is your position on the post-work narrative? Taiwan having an industry-heavy economy, how is the country preparing for this eventuality?

10. I usually like finishing my interviews by asking: What question did I not ask but should have?

Dear Minister Tang,

I trust your European trip to Spain, Britain and France was a success and that you achieved what you set out to.

I wanted to humbly touch base with you and remind you of our ongoing conversation. I understand full well that you haven't had a minute to yourself in the last couple weeks and your return to Taipei will coincide with catching up on many issues there, so please answer in your own time, I am already grateful you have agreed to this exchange.

As I mentioned previously, I do not know if the number of questions I have asked is too important. Please advise me so that it may not be too time consuming for you.

Thank you very much. I look forward to your answer. Welcome home.

Respectfully,

Vincent

Hi! I've just landed to Taiwan yesterday. :-) Replies below:

1. Internet has enabled mass self-communication among citizens, resulting in an accelerated pace of assembly and speech.

I consider access to an open Internet through digital tools as a human right.

By their nature, such tools gives rise to "adhocracies", where new forms of legitimacy are self-programmed through — and contained within the topologies of — these tools. Elected representatives are part of this network.

2. Active participants in adhocracies tend to experience trust to their peers — termed "swift trust" — and distrust traditional authorities.

This leads to a pressure on democratic governments to innovate and regain trust from citizens.

3. The Free Software, Open Source and Free Culture movements have inspired me.

People donated their talents, their time, their resources on furthering not only the freedom of software (freedoms to use ; to study the source ; to copy ; to change and apply improvements), but also people who have worked on the freedom of assembly and the freedom of speech, which underlies the whole free software movement.

In particular, I would like to thank the late civic hacker Aaron Swartz, the Internet's own child, for pioneering (not only in code, but also in writing) the radical transparency that I'm currently practicing in Taiwan.

4. By ensuring broadband access as a basic right, and improving digital literacy throughout all populations. Technologists are also invited to design in an accessible, multi-modal way.

5. By enforcing a "consensus threshold" for binding agenda — e.g. when there are two groups (60% and 40%), taking all of 60% and half of 40%, gives us 80% — mobilization on Pol.is is ineffective and so people are disinclined to spam the engine.

In cases of multiple groups or more extreme groups, Chris from Pol.is development group came up with a multiplicative metric for each comment:

Cons(c) = _{def} \prod _ {g \in G} 2 \min ( P_a(g, c) - 0.5, 0 )

where G is the set of groups and P_a(g, c) is the probability of someone in group g agreeing with comment c.

6. g0v contributors have experimented on it around 2013.

As with participatory budgeting, it has the benefit of shifting the public discourse to policy domains instead of personalities. At the moment there are no specific plans to introducing LD into the administration.

7. There are existing sortition processes for consultative hearings (登記抽籤制), however the binding power varies from case to case.

I would like to focus on gradually increasing agenda-setting power of such groups, as well as on scalable listening technologies so all stakeholders can join — to some degree — even when they are not drawn by the sortition.

8. Through collaboration with investigative journalists, data scientists, and other storytellers who can translate raw material into narratives.

9. Post-work, as you described, is an eventuality — not necessarily happening in my lifetime, and not necessarily happening in a way that benefits everyone.

Preparation involves a shift of focus of K-12 education on Autonomy, Communication and Common Good — three traits that we think will remain helpful throughout increased automation on cognitive work.

10. I think these are great questions. :-)

For a bit more context on trusting the collective intelligence of citizens, here is a recent speech I gave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8E_k02ltzI

Dear Minister Tang,

I apologize. I have only just seen your answer. For some reason Wiselike did not update me. Thank you so much for having taken the time. I really appreciate it. You can find the interview in Q&A format on my site here: http://www.whathappensnow.xyz/lessonsblog/2017/1/3/discussion-audrey-tang-taiwanese-digital-minister

I also would like to take the opportunity to wish you a very happy 2017. I truly wish you great success in all your undertakings.

If ever you are back in Paris (or New Zealand for the next two months) and have time, I would be very happy to buy you a cup of coffee and thank you in person, as well as probably continuing the conversation :)

Best Regards and again thank you,

Vincent

唐鳳我能看妳2012年以前的錄影嗎？謝謝。

之前的演講都是以分享資訊科學知識為主，例如 2007 年在東京的〈Perl 6 Today〉： https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqM36cwcZOQ

那妳會擔心妳的工具不夠嗎？

不會。在新的情形下，可以打造新的工具（像我們在 Wiselike 上交換事實、感受這樣），不需要受現有的工具限制。

妳指的是共享經濟的概念嗎？:-)

謝謝您的耐心回覆

真的很感謝您，也期待您可以對現在的政府帶來許多新的改變 !